Introduction Self Determination Section

Running head: Investigating the1

Ms 35 12

Investigatingthe Experience of Outdoor and Adventurous Project Work in an Educational SettingUsing aSelf-Determination Framework

John Sproule a, Russell Martindale b, John Wang c, Peter Allison a, Christine Nash b, and Shirley Gray a.

a The Institute for Sport, Physical Education & Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh,

Scotland.

b Edinburgh Napier University, Scotland.

c National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Address for correspondence to:

Russell Martindale

School of Life, Sport & Social Sciences,

Edinburgh Napier University,

Sighthill Campus,

Edinburgh EH11 4BN,

Scotland.

E-mail address:

Tel: 0131 4552625 Fax: 0131 4552291

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to carry out a preliminary investigation to explore the use of outdoor and adventurous Project Work (PW) within an educational setting. Specifically, differences between the PW and normal academic school experienceswere examined using a self-determination theory framework integrated with a goal orientation and psychological skills perspective. Additionally, an exploratory investigation was carried out to examine the extent to which key motivation constructs predicted skill development (i.e. problem solving, collaboration and communication) through the PW experience. Six questionnaires were adapted and utilised to collect the relevant data for both school and PW experiences (Basic Psychological Needs Questionnaire; the Learning Climate Questionnaire; Intrinsic Motivation Inventory; the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire; 2 X 2 Achievement Goal QuestionnairesandPerceived Skills Learned in PW) from the 224 students (Mean age 13.2 ±0.3 years) who participated in the 12-dayPW.Results indicated that there weresignificant differences between school and PW experience (p < .01). Specifically, PW experiencerated higher inautonomy supportive climate,autonomous motivation, perceived competence, and a greater emphasis on task approach goal orientation.Furthermore as a cohort, the students reported improvements in problem solving, collaboration and communication as a result of the PW experience. Finally, an exploratory hierarchical regression analysis revealed potential importance of perceived value, utilising meta-cognitive skills, and experiencing relatedness and autonomy in the prediction of skill development through PW experiences. Thefindings of this study present preliminary support the potential usefulness of outdoor and adventurous PW within a school context and provide implications for future research which are discussed further.

Keywords:outdoor; adventure; project work; young people; self-determination

Introduction

School Context

In the quote below, Fleming, Allen & Barcelona (2011) highlight the importanceofintegratingthe formal education curriculum with activities and experiences beyond the classroomin order to maximise positive and relevant impact on young people.

Schools have the opportunity to focus on both academic and non-academic outcomes, including promoting multiple areas of competence, character, connections to others, caring, and contribution to society. Such approaches can enhance the academic process. The potential for realizing these outcomes lies in the connection to student opportunities beyond the school day (p.55)

Leading on from this, there is evidence to suggest that one such avenue for positive impact (e.g., independence, confidence and self-esteem)is outdoor adventure programmes(Allison & Von Wald, 2010). For some, this has led to outdoor adventure and learning to be accepted as a valuable part of education. For example, at George Watson’s College (GWC - Edinburgh, Scotland), S3 projects (secondary schoolpupils aged 13-14) became an official part of the curriculum in 1962, despite parental concerns about possible adverse effects on their children’s academic progress and the more recent fears for the safety of youngsters. The S3 project is a 12 day holisticexperience for students away from the classroom, their families and the everyday technology they rely on. There is a broad range of 12 day projectswhich the students self selectbased on the nature of the activity and level of challenge. The main purposes of this experiential learning include the facilitation of important attributes and skills for life(e.g. motivation, problem solving skills, communication and collaboration) byproviding students with an insight into themselves, their values, their priorities, their friendships and their relationships with their teachers (Smith Young, 2003).As such, it is important to try to understand the ways in which these types of activities impact on children in order to facilitate effective practice and provide evidence of their efficacy and ‘added valueness’ to the school experience.

Theoretical Backdrop

Self Determination Theory (SDT) presents a well-researched and accepted view of human development whereby individuals endeavour to actualise their potential, whilst benefiting from a range of enhanced outcomes such as heightened motivation, wellbeing, independence and self-responsibility (cf. Deci & Ryan, 2002). This fits well with some of the main aims of the school experience, which is to lay the foundations for young people to fulfil their potential and develop into well rounded, successful citizens. Indeed, there has been extensive research that has examined the influence of the SDT within an educational domain (e.g., Miserandino, 1996; Ryan & Grolnick, 1986; Standage, Duda, Ntoumanis, 2005; Vallerand, Fortier & Guay, 1997).

Usefullywithin this context,the evidence presents both an important theoretical standpoint about the nature of human motivation and a basis for evidence based practice as outlinedby the efficacy of an ‘autonomy supportive climate’ (e.g., Reeve, 1998; Vallerand et al., 1997).Deci & Ryan, (2002) provide an overview of the vast range of educational benefits of providing such a climate (e.g., achievement, positive emotions, self-esteem, understanding, flexible thinking, creativity). While it is hypothesised that positive impact occurs through increased perceived competence and/or self-determination,the exact links between features of the autonomy supportive climate and change are less clear (cf., Reeve, 2002).Furthermore, it is becoming apparent in the literature that other theories would usefully be integrated within a SDT framework in an attempt to understand the mechanisms for change in a more explicit and tangible way (e.g. Amiot, Gaudreau & Blanchard, 2004; Hein & Hagger, 2007). In the case of this study, the integration of goal orientation and psychological skills with SDT were perceived pertinent additions to investigate. To exemplify the rationale for the consideration of these two additional approaches within a SDT framework, a concise outline of SDT and relevant exemplars of literature pertaining to goal orientations and pertinent psychological skills are presented.

On a basic level,SDT maintains that there are two main types of motivation. Firstly, intrinsic, which refers to engaging in a task for reasons that emanate from within the self or within the activity itself, and secondly, extrinsic,which refers to doing a task for reasons that emanate from outside of the self (e.g., rewards). Indeed, while it is a complex issue, as a general rule, research suggests that intrinsic motivation has many more advantages.For example, intrinsic motivation has been shown torelate to more effective coping skills, higher confidence, more persistence, better relationships, and improved performance (cf., Deci & Ryan, 2002). Importantly for this investigation, it is also likely to encourage the use and development of problem solving skills (Grolnick & Ryan, 1989), communication and collaboration (Field & Hoffman, 1994). While extrinsic motivation has an important role to play in certain circumstances, as described by a subtheory of SDT -the Organismic Integration Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985),more controlling motivations typicallyhave been shown to be linked to negative outcomes such as increased anxiety, maladaptive coping and drop out (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Ryan, Lynch, Vansteenkiste, & Deci, 2010; Tessier, Sarrazin & Ntoumanis, 2010).

Furthermore, SDT provides specific guidance on the features that facilitate increased intrinsic motivation. For example, another sub-theory of SDT, Basic Psychological Needs,highlights that perceptions of competence, relatedness and self-determination are key to the development of intrinsic motivation. Indeed, the implication of this is that individuals will gravitate towards situations and act in ways which satisfy these needs (Deci & Ryan, 2008). More specifically, perceived competence relates to the extent to which someone feels able and has opportunities to use and express their skills. Relatedness on the other hand refers to having a sense of belongingness, involvement and connection with others through their experiences. Finally, self-determinationrepresents a feeling of being in control of one’s own behaviour, in the sense that it is perceived to be both initiated and valued by the individual themselves. Indeed, perceived freedom from constraining forces has been shown to be one of the most important predictors of meaningful experiences (Säfvenbom, 2002). Research has established that across a number of domains that there is a clear link betweensatisfaction of the three basic psychological needs and enhanced intrinsic motivation.

Leading on from this, a further sub theory of SDT called the Cognitive Evaluation Theory provides an understanding of the effect of the environment on intrinsic motivation in more detail. This presents the idea that any given event or social interaction has the potential to influence an individual’s intrinsic motivation. The key features of this theory involve the extent to which the experience either increases perceptions of self-determination or competence. However, it is important to point out that from this theoretical stance, for intrinsic motivation to be enhanced some level of self-determination is required (Deci & Ryan, 1985). For example, situations involving expected rewards, threats of punishment, deadlines, evaluation, and competition have all shown to reduce intrinsic motivation when the controlling aspect is salient. On the other hand, situations focussed on providing choice and empathy improved intrinsic motivation, as did interactions involving positive performance feedback, this time through an informational focus giving enhanced perceptions of competence. Indeed, this type of autonomy supportive climatehas been shown to have significant impact on pupils’ behaviour and performance (Vansteenkiste, Simons, Lens, Sheldon & Deci, 2004), and can be learned to be implemented by teachers successfully (Chatzisarantis & Hagger, 2009).

As it has been stated earlier, it is important to appreciate that due to the inherent complexity of motivation no one single theory has the ability to explain behaviour in its entirety (Wang, Liu & Chye, 2010). Indeed, researchers have highlighted to importance of utilising a combination of theories within research design (Weiner, 1992), particularly when there is a clear rationale and logic to their fit.

One such fit would appear to be the integration of psychological skills. With regards to self-determined behaviouras described by SDT, it is important to recognise the need for someone to have the ‘skills’to underpin autonomous behaviour and decision making(e.g. metacognitive skills; self regulation skills; psychological skills (termed psychological characteristics of developing excellence(e.g.,Collins, Martindale, Button, & Sowerby, 2010; Zimmerman, 2008). For example, to facilitate someone’s ability to initiate or feel in control of their behaviour (e.g. self-determination), they would greatly benefit from having key meta-cognitive skills,such as ability to plan, monitor, review their cognitions and behaviours. Indeed, self-regulated learning involves monitoring, regulating, and controlling cognition, behaviour, and motivation (Martin & McLellan, 2008; Zimmerman, 2008), which is reflected in taking responsibility for learning and practice behaviour which has been shown to result in more effective learning (Toering, Elfereink-Gemser, Jordet, Jorna, Pepping, & Visscher, 2011). Indeed, as with self-determination itself,the ability to use meta-cognitive skills leads to other positive outcomes such as initiative, perseverance, and adaptive skills (Zimmerman, 2006), competence, self-esteem and well-being (Chirkov & Ryan, 2001; Deci & Ryan, 2002). As such, perhaps these positive outcomes can be enhanced further when these theories and concepts are integrated in practice. For example, teachers can be taught and encouraged to create anautonomy supportive environment (Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Jeon, & Barch, 2004), aswell as specifically teach the meta-cognitive skills required to monitor and direct one’s own thought processes and behaviour (Collins et al., 2010; Halpern, 1996).

Building on this,Goal Orientation Theory (Nicholls, 1989) has also been shown to fit well within a SDT framework because of the relevance it places on perceived competence. For example, like SDT, Goal Orientation Theory places significant importance on perceived competence as a key antecedent in the development of intrinsic motivation.However, the way in which someone perceives success is an important factor in understanding their self-perceptions of competence. One person who predominantly utilises social norms to evaluate their competence will perceive themselves very differently to someone who uses self-reference criteria. As such, this consideration of individual differences with respect to the impact of goal orientation and perceptions of success/competence to subsequent motivational outcomesadds an additional dimension to the understanding of motivation through a SDT framework. Indeed, there are a number of researchers who have already successfully attempted to integratethese theories together (e.g., Georgiadis, Biddle, Chatzisarantis, 2001; Hein & Hagger, 2007; Standage & Treasure, 2002)

On a basic levelGoal Orientation Theory suggests two major goal orientations can be adopted. First, task orientation,which focuses on success as self-referenced mastery and, secondly, ego orientation, which defines successthrough a normative comparison of ability. While both orientations have been shown to facilitate adaptive motivational patterns, for ego orientation, this is only the case when perceived competence is high. When perceived competence is low, ego orientated individuals are likely to be motivationally fragile and exhibit maladaptive motivational patterns (Wang et al., 2010). This is important because how we define success plays an important role in our perceptions of competence as described by SDT. Building on this work, Elliot and McGregor (2001) have proposed a 2x2 achievement goal framework which incorporates an additional dimension of avoidance/approach orientations, which fits well with the concept of motivation by fear of failure. Specifically, crossing the dimensions of task/ego orientation with approach/avoidance orientation yields four achievement goals. Mastery-approach (e.g. I want to learn new skills); Mastery-avoidance (e.g. I am concerned that I may not learn as much as I want to); Performance approach (e.g. I want to be better than others); and finally performance-avoidance (e.g. I must not get beaten by others). Research has highlighted benefits from approach orientation (McGregor & Elliot, 2002), in addition to the plentiful support for the advantages of task orientation (Ntoumanis & Biddle, 1999).

Summary

Given this theoretical backdrop and evidence base, there would appear to be a goodrationale to integrate these theories. Indeed, it would seem to be advantageous for teachers to adopt autonomy supportive teaching styles, encourage mastery-approach goal orientations,and focus on teaching meta-cognitive skills that facilitate the learning process in order to enhance intrinsic motivation, well being, learning and performance outcomes in studentsas effectively as possible (Benware Deci, 1984; Grolnick Ryan, 1987).

Given the aim of the GWC project work was to add value to the school experience explicitly by developing motivation and life skills it was considered appropriate to use this framework to investigate any differences there may be between school and PW experiences. Furthermore, the development of problem solving, collaboration and communication skills was also an explicit aim of the PW experience. As such, changes in these skills were measured, and predictive capabilities (for skill development) of the key psychological constructs described above were also examined.

Method

Participants and Procedures

A total of 224 students from one private school in Edinburgh (Scotland) took part in the study. The sample consisted of 125 males and 99 females with a mean age of 13.2 years (± 0.3), from all of the classes in S3 i.e. all the students from one year group volunteered to participate in the study. Although the sample included students from the full range of socio-economic status, the majority of the students were of middle and upper socio-economic status. This school offers approximately 150 foundation scholarships across the age range 11-18 years to young people from low socio-economic groupings. However, because of the sensitive nature of this information the researchers were not able to access this to any greater detail, but we do know that it is likely that around 14% of the participants were from low socio-economic groupings. We chose to work with this school because they had been organisingoutdoor adventure school projects for S3 students as part of their official curriculum since 1962.

Informed consent was obtained from the school Headmaster,the teacher with responsibility for projects, the students’ parents, and the students.The study had ethical approval from the Moray House School of Education ethics committee, University of Edinburgh. The school based survey was conducted during the school day immediately before going on projects, andthe PW survey was conducted during the school day two days after returning from projects.

Project Descriptions

Students complete a project choice form within two weeks of attending a January evening meeting with their parents at the school. At this meeting the teacher with responsibility for projects described the various projects and explained the level of physical challenge aspect on the project choice forms. A great deal of care was taken when allocating pupils to groups and projects.The duration of the 18 different projects is 12 days in the month of May each year, after the S3 exam period. During the 12-day PW students and parents are not allowed contact unless in an emergency, and remain under supervision of their usual school teachers. The students engage in planning the projects in collaboration with their teachers and during the 12 days they are entirely self-sufficient. Apart from the cycling and sailing projects, the main activity on all projects is walking in remote regions of Scotland, staying in youth hostels/bunkhouses/bothies, with overnight camps in tents or self-made shelters. The students chose additional activities such as observing golden eagles and rare red kites in their natural habitat, visiting historic sites and learning about the wildlife of the regions, taking part in kayaking and other water sports. Overnight backpack trips, team building activities, visiting Britain’s first geopark, mountain biking, abseiling/rock climbing, and canyoning were also other activities chosen. Additionally, they can work towards the John Muir Award ( and other types of conservation experiences.